Ron C. # 10

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bowling said it takes rock-solid alibis before detectives can eliminate anyone and those have not been established. He said the best that can be done is assign degrees of suspicion to people.

“Where is the responsibility in saying somebody is not a suspect?” he said.

Im thinkin this proves that someones werk alibi isn't real solid.......I would think RC who was supposed to be working all night would be the easiest to clear with a work alibi....guess not.
Also RC states himself that they shouldnt be looking back at what happened 7 yrs ago...12/12/2002 - POSSESSION OF COCAINE, POSSESSION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, POSSESSION OF CANNABIS UNDER 20 GRAMS, POSSESSION OF DRUG WITHOUT PRESCRIPTION, POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA.
guess hes claiming responsibility for this charge after all and it was not a set up......
jmooc
 
Posting all of this again will take up a lot of space, but I have a number of questions that have never really been addressed regarding this record.

1. Why do people say there were no convictions when there were NUMEROUS guilty pleas, fines leveled, probation given, community service assigned, rehab type courses required etc. ALL of those are technically convictions to my knowledge.

2. Why is much of this record NOT included in most of the other times that it has been posted?
******EDITED TO ADD****This is the LATER part of his record only.....there are numerous additional charges preceding these which start in 2004---as referred to in the preceding post regarding 2002 charges.

3. Why is it stated that these charges were all from years ago before he had custody when the dates clearly show that they are NOT?

4. Also of note there are at least 10 times here when apparently RON HAD GIVEN AN INCORRECT ADDRESS and notices were recorded as unable to be delivered.


File Date: 2004-11-16 Judge: A W NICHOLS III
Defense Atty: FELICIANO, SHARON
Defendant
CUMMINGS, RONALD LEMYLES
Date # Docket Description
2004-11-16 1 ARREST REPORT - PCSO EDGAR (ARREST 11/12/04)
2004-11-16 1 POSSESSION OF CANNABIS IN EXCESS OF 20 GRAMS
2004-11-16 1 POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA
2004-11-16 1 MAINTAINING A DRUG VEHICLE
2004-11-16 3 TRAFFIC CITATION - #7877-DBJ 2
2004-11-16 4 AFFIDAVIT OF INSOLVENCY
2004-11-16 5 ORDER APPOINTING PUBLIC DEFENDER FOR 1ST APP HEARING
2004-11-16 6 APPEARANCE BOND - UNSECURED $ 2,012
2004-12-03 7 INFORMATION (CT 1-POSSESSION OF CANNABIS IN EXCESS
2004-12-03 7 OF 20 GRAMS)
2004-12-07 8 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (01-07-2005)
2005-01-07 9 ARRAIGNMENT MINUTES: DEFT PRESENT, SWORN, ARRAIGNED,
2005-01-07 9 PUBLIC DEFENDER APPOINTED, ENTERED PLEA OF NOT GUILTY,
2005-01-07 9 SET FOR PRE TRIAL 02/03/2005.
2005-01-07 10 AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENT STATUS
2005-01-07 10 DEFENDANT ADJUDGED INDIGENT
2005-01-25 17 PUBLIC DEFENDER, DEFT SCREENED BY TREATMENT AND DEEMED
2005-01-25 17 APPROPRIATE FOR DRUG COURT, DEFT DECLINED THE DRUG COURT
2005-02-03 18 ADI - LEVEL II
2005-03-03 20 DEFT SWORN, W/D FORMER PLEA, PLEAD NOLO A/C, ADVISED
2005-03-03 20 MAX PENALTY 5 YRS DOC &/OR $5000 FINE, PSI WAIVED,
2005-03-03 20 PLEA ACCEPTED, SENTENCING SET SAME DAY
2005-03-03 20 ADJUDICATION OF GUILT WITHHELD
2005-03-03 20 $370.00 COURT COSTS (6 MONTHS TO PAY)
2005-03-03 20 ADI PROGRAM - LEVEL II
2005-09-08 21 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION OF ADI LEVEL II PROGRAM
************************************************** ****************
Date # Docket Description
2006-11-14 1 TRAFFIC CITATION - #6417-EEN 3 PCSO OFF/MANNING
2006-11-14 1 LEAVING THE SCENE OF ACCIDENT INVOLVING INJURIES
2006-12-12 2 MOTION TO TRANSFER CASE TO COUNTY COURT
2006-12-19 3 ORDER TO TRANSFER CASE TO COUNTY COURT
************************************************** ****************
2006-08-01 1 ARREST REPORT - PCSO/ MAY (ARREST 07-29-2006)
2006-08-01 1 TRESPASS
2006-08-01 2 AFFIDAVIT OF INSOLVENCY
2006-08-01 3 $504.00 CHUCK'S BAIL BOND POSTED - #00601638 07-29-06
2006-08-11 4 INFORMATION (TRESPASS)
2006-08-31 6 ARR MIN: DEFT PRES, ADJ INS P D APPT MACK BRUNTON
2006-08-31 6 ARR ENT PLEA OF NOT GUILTY - PRE TRIAL SET 10/04/2006
2006-08-31 7 AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENT STATUS
2006-08-31 7 DEFENDANT ADJUDGED INDIGENT
2006-08-31 7 $40.00 APPLICATION FEE IMPOSED
2006-08-31 8 ORDER APPOINTING PUBLIC DEFENDER
2006-08-31 9 PRE-TRIAL ORDER (10-04-2006)
2006-09-06 10 NOTICE TO BONDSMAN (10-04-2006)
2006-10-04 11 PRE TRIAL MINUTES: DEFT PRES, ATT BY MACK BRUNTON
2006-10-04 11 STATE AND DEFENSE ANNOUNCED READY FOR TRIAL
2006-10-04 11 CASE SET FOR NON JURY TRIAL 10/30/2006
2006-10-04 12 WAIVER OF JURY TRIAL
2006-10-04 13 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (10-30-2006)
2006-10-06 14 NOTICE TO BONDSMAN (10-30-2006)
2006-10-10 15 STATE ATTORNEY WITNESS SUBPOENA ISSUED:
2006-10-10 15 WILLIAM P MORRIS
2006-10-10 16 STATE ATTORNEY WITNESS SUBPOENA ISSUED:
2006-10-10 16 DS JOHN MAY
2006-10-16 17 STATE ATTORNEY WITNESS SUBPOENA RETURNED SERVED:
2006-10-16 17 WILLIAM P MORRIS
2006-10-16 18 STATE ATTORNEY WITNESS SUBPOENA RETURNED SERVED:
2006-10-16 18 DS JOHN MAY
2006-10-16 20 STATE ATTORNEY WITNESS SUBPOENA RETURNED SERVED:
2006-10-16 19 MS. TAMMY PINKNEY
2006-10-26 21 AMENDED INFO (TRESPASS ON PROPERTY OTHER THAN A
2006-10-26 21 STRUCTURE OR CONVEYANCE)
2006-10-30 22 TRIAL MINUTES: DEFT PRES ATT BY MACK BRUNTON
2006-10-30 22 FOR NON JURY TRIAL- STATE REP BY DAVID HOLLANDER
2006-10-30 22 DEFT W-DREW FORMER PLEA - ENT PLEA OF NOLO CONTENDERE
2006-10-30 22 TO TRESPASS, DEFT SWORN, PLEA ACCEPTED,
2006-10-30 22 ADJUDGED GUILTY
2006-10-30 22 PROB HRDS 6 MONTHS
2006-10-30 22 1 DAY PCJ WITH CREDIT FOR TIME SERVED OF 1 DAY
2006-10-30 22 $273.00 FINE AND COST
2006-10-30 22 $ 40.00 PD FEE SUSPENDED
2006-10-30 22 RANDOM DRUG TEST
2006-10-30 23 WRITTEN PLEA OF GUILTY OR NOLO CONTENDERE TO
2006-10-30 23 CRIMINAL CHARGES IN COUNTY COURT
2006-10-30 24 ORDER OF PROBATION
2007-01-17 25 $ 60.00 FINE AND COST PAYMENT 11/14/2006
2007-02-07 26 SUCCESSFUL TERMINATION OF PROBATION
2007-02-14 27 $120.00 FINE AND COST PAYMENT 12/28/2006
2007-03-16 28 $ 93.00 FINE AND COST BAL PAID 01/25/2007
************************************************** ****************
2006-11-14 1 TRAFFIC CITATION - #6417EEN-3 PCSO/ MANNING 10-30-06
2006-11-14 1 LEAVING THE SCENE OF AN ACCIDENT
2006-12-12 2 MOTION TO TRANSFER CASE TO COUNTY COURT
2006-12-19 3 ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO TRANSFER CASE TO COUNTY COURT
2006-12-19 3 FROM CIRCUIT COURT 06-002339-CF53
2006-12-19 4 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (01-23-2007)
2007-01-02 5 NOTICE RETURNED UNEXECUTED - NO SUCH NUMBER
2007-01-05 6 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (01-23-2007)
2007-01-12 7 NOTICE RETURNED UNEXECUTED - NO SUCH NUMBER
2007-01-23 8 ARRAIGNMENT MINUTES: DEFT NOT PRESENT IN COURT
2007-01-23 8 COURT ORDERED CAPIAS
2007-01-23 8 BOND SET AT $1004 FIRM
2007-01-23 9 CAPIAS ISSUED - BOND SET AT $1004 FIRM
2007-01-25 10 CAPIAS RECALLED - CASE SET FOR ARRAIGNMENT 02/06/2007
2007-01-25 10 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (02-06-2007) IN OFFICE
2007-01-25 11 CHANGE OF ADDRESS
2007-01-26 12 CAPIAS RETURNED
2007-02-06 13 ARRAIGNMENT MINUTES: ON MOTION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA THE
2007-02-06 13 THE CASE WAS ORDERED NOLLE PROSEQUI IN OPEN COURT
2007-02-06 13 INFRACTION DISMISSED CIT # 6416EEN2 - CARELESS DRIVING
2007-02-06 13 INFRACTION DISMISSED CIT # 6418EEN4 - OPERATE ATV
2007-02-06 13 W/O HELMET
2007-02-06 14 WAIVER OF COUNSEL
************************************************** ****************
2007-04-03 1 COMPLAINT FILED: PCSO/ WALTER 04-02-07
2007-04-03 1 AFFRAY
2007-04-23 2 INFORMATION (AFFRAY)
2007-04-23 3 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (05/10/2007)CERTIFIED
2007-05-10 4 ARRAIGNMENT MINUTES: COURT ORDERED CASE CONTINUED
2007-05-10 4 TO NEXT ARRAIGNMENT 06/12/2007
2007-05-10 5 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (06-12-2007)
2007-05-18 6 NOTICE RETURNED UNEXECUTED - UNCLAIMED
2007-06-12 7 ARRAIGNMENT MINUTES: COURT ORDERED CASE CONTINUED
2007-06-12 7 TO NEXT ARRAIGNMENT 07/12/2007
2007-06-12 8 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (07-12-2007)
2007-06-14 9 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (07-12-2007) IN OFFICE
2007-07-12 10 ARR MIN: DEFT PRES, ADJ INS P D APPT MACK BRUNTON
2007-07-12 10 ARR ENT PLEA OF NOT GUILTY - PRE TRIAL SET 08/22/2007
2007-07-12 11 AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENT STATUS
2007-07-12 11 DEFENDANT ADJUDGED INDIGENT
2007-07-12 11 $40.00 APPLICATION FEE IMPOSED
2007-07-12 12 ORDER APPOINTING PUBLIC DEFENDER
2007-07-12 13 PRE-TRIAL ORDER (08-22-2007)
2007-08-22 14 PRE TRIAL MINUTES: DEFT PRES, ATT BY MACK BRUNTON
2007-08-22 14 ON MOTION OF DEFENSE COUNSEL, COURT ORDERED CASE
2007-08-22 14 CONTINUED TO 09/19/2007
2007-08-22 15 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (09-19-2007) IN COURT
2007-09-19 16 PRE TRIAL MINUTES: DEFERRED PROSECUTION AGREEMENT FILED
2007-09-19 16 AND ACCEPTED
2007-09-19 17 DEFERRED PROSECUTION AGREEMENT
2007-09-19 17 10 HOURS COMMUNITY SERVICE
2007-09-19 17 $50.00 COST OF PROSECUTION
2007-09-28 18 MEMO FROM HRDS: DEFT COMPLETED THE CONDITIONS OF HIS
2007-09-28 18 PRE-TRIAL DIVERSION PROGRAM
2007-10-18 19 NOTICE OF SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF DEFERRED
2007-10-18 19 PROSECUTION AGREEMENT
2007-11-28 20 $100.00 PAYMENT MADE TO CASE 09/18/2007
************************************************** ****************
2007-11-14 1 WILDLIFE CITATION - #132466-C GFFC/ EASON 11-02-07
2007-11-14 1 POSSESSION OF MODERN FIREARM DURING MUZZLELOADING
2007-11-14 1 SEASON
2007-11-14 1 TRESPASS
2007-11-14 2 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (12-18-2007)
2007-11-29 3 NOTICE RETURNED UNEXECUTED
2007-11-29 4 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (12/18/2007)CORRECT ADDRESS
2007-12-18 5 ARR MIN: DEFT PRES IN COURT WAIVING RIGHT TO COUNSEL
2007-12-18 5 ARR ENT PLEA OF NOLO CONTENDERE TO CT I - POSS OF
2007-12-18 5 MODERN FIREARM DURING MUZZELOADING SEASON - CT II -
2007-12-18 5 TRESPASS - NOLLE PROSEQUI - DEFT SWORN, PLEA ACCEPTED
2007-12-18 5 DEFENDANT ADJUDGED GUILTY
2007-12-18 5 $273.00 FINE AND COST SUSPENDED
2007-12-18 5 24 HOURS HOUSE ARREST
2007-12-18 6 WAIVER OF COUNSEL
2007-12-18 7 WRITTEN PLEA OF GUILTY OR NOLO CONTENDERE TO
2007-12-18 7 CRIMINAL CHARGES IN COUNTY COURT
2008-01-08 8 JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE CT I
 
For those who want the more complete record....Here is the prior to 2004 record that I copied from the documents link....it notes that it is ABRIDGED which may very well mean there are additional charges and court decisions that were edited out of this version.

***************
Ronald Lemyles Cummings records (abridged):

10/24/2001 - Assault Complaint

12/12/2002 - POSSESSION OF COCAINE, POSSESSION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, POSSESSION OF CANNABIS UNDER 20 GRAMS, POSSESSION OF DRUG WITHOUT PRESCRIPTION, POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA.
Sentence: maybe someone can translate. These are the notes from the trial: THE CASE WAS ORDERED NOLLE PROSEQUI IN OPEN COURT ANNOUNCEMENT OF NOLLE PROSEQUI - ENT CIR CT MIN

12/12/2002 - ATTEMPTING TO TAKE DEER BY GUN AND LIGHT AT NIGHT
Notes:
2003-01-23 5 CRIMINAL CHARGES IN COUNTY COURT
2003-01-23 6 ADJ OF GUILT AND PLACING DEFENDANT CT I
2003-01-23 6 ON PROBATION AND SUCCESSFUL TERMINATION OF PROBATION
2003-01-23 7 ADJ OF GUILT AND PLACING DEFENDANT CT II
2003-01-23 7 ON PROBATION AND SUCCESSFUL TERMINATION OF PROBATION
2003-03-04 8 $188.00 FINE PAID 02/18/2003
2003-03-04 9 $ 25.00 COURT FACILITY FEE PAID 02/18/2003
2003-03-04 10 $ 25.00 WILDLIFE ALERT FUND PAYMENT 02/18/2003

************
Prior to these charges which begin in 2001, I believe other previous charges would be part of his juvenile record which, of course, is unavailable to us.
 
Bowling said it takes rock-solid alibis before detectives can eliminate anyone and those have not been established. He said the best that can be done is assign degrees of suspicion to people.

“Where is the responsibility in saying somebody is not a suspect?” he said.

Im thinkin this proves that someones werk alibi isn't real solid.......I would think RC who was supposed to be working all night would be the easiest to clear with a work alibi....guess not.
Also RC states himself that they shouldnt be looking back at what happened 7 yrs ago...12/12/2002 - POSSESSION OF COCAINE, POSSESSION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, POSSESSION OF CANNABIS UNDER 20 GRAMS, POSSESSION OF DRUG WITHOUT PRESCRIPTION, POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA.
guess hes claiming responsibility for this charge after all and it was not a set up......
jmooc

How in the world can you think that someone's work alibi isn't that solid. That is one of the only facts that we have in this case. In the article you quote this was stated: Cummings was at work the night his daughter vanished and came home as the 911 call to authorities was being made.

http://www.jacksonville.com/news/me...aleighs_family_remains_divided_6_months_later

Whether or not he was at work has been confirmed by LE, it has been stated from the beginning that he was present for his shift and he got home as the 911 call was being made. If you are of the opinion that LE feels he wasn't at work and PDM Bridge is lying I really would like to read a link to support that information.

If it is your opinion that something happened to Haleigh prior to Ronald going to work and he went to his shift after said event....then fine, say that. I do not think it is fair that people keep insisting RC was not at work when LE tells he that they confirmed and he was at work??
 
How in the world can you think that someone's work alibi isn't that solid. That is one of the only facts that we have in this case. In the article you quote this was stated: Cummings was at work the night his daughter vanished and came home as the 911 call to authorities was being made.

http://www.jacksonville.com/news/me...aleighs_family_remains_divided_6_months_later

Whether or not he was at work has been confirmed by LE, it has been stated from the beginning that he was present for his shift and he got home as the 911 call was being made. If you are of the opinion that LE feels he wasn't at work and PDM Bridge is lying I really would like to read a link to support that information.

If it is your opinion that something happened to Haleigh prior to Ronald going to work and he went to his shift after said event....then fine, say that. I do not think it is fair that people keep insisting RC was not at work when LE tells he that they confirmed and he was at work??


BBM

This is actually a new "version" of the story.....It is clear from the 911 call that Ron was ALREADY there when it was made....and the story from both he and MC has always been either 1) that she was standing in the door waiting on him to get home, but not on the phone and/or 2) that she had made several calls to him that he didn't bother to answer and/or 3) other assorted versions but NEVER -- until now -- have they said MC was already on the phone with 911 when Ron arrived.
 
How in the world can you think that someone's work alibi isn't that solid. That is one of the only facts that we have in this case. In the article you quote this was stated: Cummings was at work the night his daughter vanished and came home as the 911 call to authorities was being made.

http://www.jacksonville.com/news/me...aleighs_family_remains_divided_6_months_later

Whether or not he was at work has been confirmed by LE, it has been stated from the beginning that he was present for his shift and he got home as the 911 call was being made. If you are of the opinion that LE feels he wasn't at work and PDM Bridge is lying I really would like to read a link to support that information.

If it is your opinion that something happened to Haleigh prior to Ronald going to work and he went to his shift after said event....then fine, say that. I do not think it is fair that people keep insisting RC was not at work when LE tells he that they confirmed and he was at work??
~BBM~
this sentence from a reporter, is recapping the story and also states RC came home as the 911 call to authorities was being made.....wrong.
Speaking of links, I have yet to see a link to where LE states RC was at work his entire shift and what those hours were.......and I am of the belief something "could" have happened prior to his shift, yet my post was not about that..... jmooc
 
BBM

This is actually a new "version" of the story.....It is clear from the 911 call that Ron was ALREADY there when it was made....and the story from both he and MC has always been either 1) that she was standing in the door waiting on him to get home, but not on the phone and/or 2) that she had made several calls to him that he didn't bother to answer and/or 3) other assorted versions but NEVER -- until now -- have they said MC was already on the phone with 911 when Ron arrived.


If I am reading the article correctly a reporter states that RC came home as the 911 call were being made so it didn't come from LE or RC and MC. So if there is a "new version of the story" it didn't come from RC or MC or LE.

I can appreciate the argument that something may have happened to Haleigh before RC went to work, I don't agree with that opinion but it has not been ruled out by LE. LE did however state that RC was at work, do we not agree on that?
 
If I am reading the article correctly a reporter states that RC came home as the 911 call were being made so it didn't come from LE or RC and MC. So if there is a "new version of the story" it didn't come from RC or MC or LE.

I can appreciate the argument that something may have happened to Haleigh before RC went to work, I don't agree with that opinion but it has not been ruled out by LE. LE did however state that RC was at work, do we not agree on that?

I haven't seen many, if any at all, posters who don't believe that he went to work at some point during that night. When and for how long is the issue that is up for debate, and LE has never stated their information on this. I am sure they are well aware of what those times may be. It is still possible that what happened to Haleigh occurred either before he went to work, or after he got off of work. imoo
 
If I am reading the article correctly a reporter states that RC came home as the 911 call were being made so it didn't come from LE or RC and MC. So if there is a "new version of the story" it didn't come from RC or MC or LE.

I can appreciate the argument that something may have happened to Haleigh before RC went to work, I don't agree with that opinion but it has not been ruled out by LE. LE did however state that RC was at work, do we not agree on that?
~BBM~ LE has never stated that RC was at work his entire shift, nor those hours of his shift. Bowling said it takes rock-solid alibis before detectives can eliminate anyone and those have not been established. He said the best that can be done is assign degrees of suspicion to people......jmooc
 
Bowling said it takes rock-solid alibis before detectives can eliminate anyone and those have not been established. He said the best that can be done is assign degrees of suspicion to people.

“Where is the responsibility in saying somebody is not a suspect?” he said.

Im thinkin this proves that someones werk alibi isn't real solid.......I would think RC who was supposed to be working all night would be the easiest to clear with a work alibi....guess not.
Also RC states himself that they shouldnt be looking back at what happened 7 yrs ago...12/12/2002 - POSSESSION OF COCAINE, POSSESSION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, POSSESSION OF CANNABIS UNDER 20 GRAMS, POSSESSION OF DRUG WITHOUT PRESCRIPTION, POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA.
guess hes claiming responsibility for this charge after all and it was not a set up......
jmooc

LE officers vindicated for setting RC up on multiple drug charges by the perp himself...news at eleven. :crazy:


Hopefully that will stop the wild baseless accusations against honest hard working LE officers here and elsewhere.

The alibi....always had concerns the timing wasn't solid. There's my sign.
 
I follow what you both are saying....lol. Is there correct information about what the shift was supposed to be? If I might add and ask, if the AC repairman was at the home after or around 5 and Misty was at the trailer giving the kids dinner out on the front porch, do you think RC was there at this time?
 
I follow what you both are saying....lol. Is there correct information about what the shift was supposed to be? If I might add and ask, if the AC repairman was at the home after or around 5 and Misty was at the trailer giving the kids dinner out on the front porch, do you think RC was there at this time?

elle - I do not think we can assume that those children were actually there until we actually have a reliable witness to it. So far, IMO we do not. We have yet to hear whether the A/C man saw HaLeigh.
 
I follow what you both are saying....lol. Is there correct information about what the shift was supposed to be? If I might add and ask, if the AC repairman was at the home after or around 5 and Misty was at the trailer giving the kids dinner out on the front porch, do you think RC was there at this time?
No, I am of the belief he was elsewhere, the elswhere is what I find to be important.....but thats me.......If it is proven to be that he was at work at that time, then I still think something could have happened after Haleigh stepped off of that bus....I also do not rule out the fact that even while he was at work, that rules him innocent, as I feel there are suspicious areas near pdm.......again his overuse of "I was at work", to me, has been a bit overkill..... jmooc
 
Also on the facts thread...in regards to RC whereabouts on the night Haleigh went missing.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - FACTS-Just the FACTS- LIST ONLY- NO DISCUSSION -FACTS ONLY

investigators actually stated his cell phone pinged at the steel plant and other employee's saw him there.

My cell phone was left in hotel in Seattle last week. As of today, I am in GA...my phone is in Seattle and will ping there. Not one employee is on the record that they were in eyesight of Ronald Cummings for the entire shift on the night in question or stating exactly what hours he was on site that evening.
 
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - FACTS-Just the FACTS- LIST ONLY- NO DISCUSSION -FACTS ONLY

In the link I posted above ....in the facts thread.....it states that RC's work schedule is 2nd shift 4:30 to 3:00am...is this false?

False ? I don't think we'll really know until either PDM or LE state the actual shift. As for the info posted in the Fact and apparently several other threads, it is hearsay from another blog site.

BBM

Originally Posted by ceejaycee
I posted this in the Anna thread in response to some comments made over there but since this is the Ron thread I thought I should post it here as well. If that isn't the right thing to do I apologize.

Someone on another message board called Ron's work several days ago to find out the shifts.
His shift is from 4:30 p.m. until 3:00 a.m.

http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php?p=12832046&highlight=4:30#post128 32046
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
201
Guests online
2,210
Total visitors
2,411

Forum statistics

Threads
589,955
Messages
17,928,285
Members
228,017
Latest member
SashaRhea82
Back
Top